如何轻松使 std::cout 线程安全?

How to easily make std::cout thread-safe?(如何轻松使 std::cout 线程安全?)
本文介绍了如何轻松使 std::cout 线程安全?的处理方法,对大家解决问题具有一定的参考价值,需要的朋友们下面随着跟版网的小编来一起学习吧!

问题描述

我有一个多线程应用程序,它大量使用 std::cout 进行日志记录而没有任何锁定.在这种情况下,如何轻松添加锁机制使 std::cout 成为线程安全的?

I have a multi-threaded application, which heavily uses std::cout for logging without any locking. In such a case, how can I easily add lock mechanism to make std::cout thread-safe?

我不想搜索每次出现的 std::cout 并添加一行锁定代码.太麻烦了.

I don't want to search for each occurrence of std::cout and add a line of locking code. That is too tedious.

有什么更好的做法吗?

推荐答案

注意:这个答案是 pre-C++20 所以它不使用 std::osyncstream 具有单独的缓冲,但使用锁代替.

我猜您可以实现自己的类,该类包装 cout 并将互斥体与其关联.那个新类的 operator << 会做三件事:

I guess you could implement your own class which wraps cout and associates a mutex with it. The operator << of that new class would do three things:

  1. 为互斥锁创建一个锁,可能会阻塞其他线程
  2. 执行输出,即对包装的流和传递的参数执行操作符 <<
  3. 构造一个不同类的实例,将锁传递给那个
  1. create a lock for the mutex, possibly blocking other threads
  2. do the output, i.e. do the operator << for the wrapped stream and the passed argument
  3. construct an instance of a different class, passing the lock to that

这个不同的类将把锁和委托操作符 << 保留到包装的流中.第二个类的析构函数最终会破坏锁并释放互斥锁.

This different class would keep the lock and delegate operator << to the wrapped stream. The destructor of that second class would eventually destroy the lock and release the mutex.

因此,您作为单个语句编写的任何输出,即作为 << 调用的单个序列,只要您的所有输出通过具有相同互斥量的对象,就会自动打印.

So any output you write as a single statement, i.e. as a single sequence of << invocations, will be printed atomically as long as all your output goes through that object with the same mutex.

让我们调用两个类 synchronized_ostreamlocked_ostream.如果 sync_coutsynchronized_ostream 的一个实例,它包装了 std::cout,那么序列

Let's call the two classes synchronized_ostream and locked_ostream. If sync_cout is an instance of synchronized_ostream which wraps std::cout, then the sequence

sync_cout << "Hello, " << name << "!" << std::endl;

将导致以下操作:

  1. synchronized_ostream::operator<<< 会获得锁
  2. synchronized_ostream::operator<< 会将Hello,"的打印委托给 cout
  3. operator<<(std::ostream&, const char*) 将打印Hello,"
  4. synchronized_ostream::operator<< 会构造一个 locked_ostream 并将锁传递给那个
  5. locked_ostream::operator<< 会将name 的打印委托给cout
  6. operator<<(std::ostream&, std::string) 将打印名称
  7. 同样的委托给 cout 发生在感叹号和结束线操纵器
  8. locked_ostream 临时被破坏,锁被释放
  1. synchronized_ostream::operator<< would aquire the lock
  2. synchronized_ostream::operator<< would delegate the printing of "Hello, " to cout
  3. operator<<(std::ostream&, const char*) would print "Hello, "
  4. synchronized_ostream::operator<< would construct a locked_ostream and pass the lock to that
  5. locked_ostream::operator<< would delegate the printing of name to cout
  6. operator<<(std::ostream&, std::string) would print the name
  7. The same delegation to cout happens for the exclamation point and the endline manipulator
  8. The locked_ostream temporary gets destructed, the lock is released

这篇关于如何轻松使 std::cout 线程安全?的文章就介绍到这了,希望我们推荐的答案对大家有所帮助,也希望大家多多支持跟版网!

本站部分内容来源互联网,如果有图片或者内容侵犯了您的权益,请联系我们,我们会在确认后第一时间进行删除!

相关文档推荐

Prevent class inheritance in C++(防止 C++ 中的类继承)
Why should I declare a virtual destructor for an abstract class in C++?(为什么要在 C++ 中为抽象类声明虚拟析构函数?)
Why is Default constructor called in virtual inheritance?(为什么在虚拟继承中调用默认构造函数?)
C++ cast to derived class(C++ 转换为派生类)
C++ virtual function return type(C++虚函数返回类型)
Is there any real risk to deriving from the C++ STL containers?(从 C++ STL 容器派生是否有任何真正的风险?)